Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Miss You (M-flo song)

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was keep, Oricon source demonstrates chart success. - Fayenatic (talk) 08:38, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Miss You (M-flo song)[edit]

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

Fails WP:NSONG. No evidence that song charted. jsfouche ☽☾Talk 01:36, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per lack of independent coverage of the single. Also, WP:NPOV for inclusion of that "fresh" qualifier on the artist...(this has since been fixed) I Jethrobot (talk) 02:15, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Keep there is an independent cover of the single. here. And It had 8th rank in oricon, which is the famous japanese music ranking organisation. I have added them and provided reliable references in the article, please check--Coekon (talk) 02:31, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Albums and songs-related deletion discussions. — Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 03:04, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

~~Do you have a source that references its ranking as 8th place on oricon?~~. (Sorry, I just checked the oricon source on the website). Also, I'm not sure this is an independent cover in the true sense, as the album's artist is clearly credited as m-flo, and the "cover" is credited to m-flo first and then to Yamamoto Ryohei （山本領平）. So it'd be more accurate to say that the song was redone by m-flo with Yamamoto than to say it is a cover. I Jethrobot (talk) 03:21, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I have. here. This is the Oricon website and you can see(過去最高 8位). That means it was 8th most popular in Oricon Chart, If you know the japanese.--Coekon (talk) 03:50, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

For the cover, you can find it from the offical web, amazon and oricon. I have confident it is the cover of this single. Oricon is reliable external reference for this single. --Coekon (talk) 04:02, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I understand the rankings (I can read Japanese-- 日本語が読められます). But, I'm even more confused about this issue about the cover. There only appears to be one song. Sure, there is the Instrumental and the vocal versions, but those aren't covers because those are still by m-flo. Miss You wasn't covered by another artist at all. The only version is the one by m-flo with Melody and Yamamoto. I Jethrobot (talk) 04:18, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You can read japanese( that's cool easy for me to explain). let's assume the oricon is a reliable independent reference. In oricon web you can see:

作詞　ｍ－ｆｌｏ
作詞　ｍｅｌｏｄｙ．
作詞　山本領平
作曲　ｍ－ｆｌｏ
作曲　ｍｅｌｏｄｙ．
作曲　山本領平

That means this single was created by ｍ－ｆｌｏ, melody. and 山本領平. The single's cover contains these artists.--Coekon (talk) 04:36, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe we are thinking about different things. I agree that there are several artists on the single. However, these artists are performing Miss You together for the very first time. A cover version of a song is new performance or rerecording of a commercially released song (also see カバー). Even though they are all artists of the first performance Miss You, that doesn't mean Miss You is a cover version.

In any case, I think we are getting a little off-topic. I think you've demonstrated chart notability well enough using the oricon rankings above. Good job. Changing my vote to a Keep. I Jethrobot (talk) 05:11, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you--Coekon (talk) 05:28, 23 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: This debate has been included in the list of Japan-related deletion discussions. --Moscowconnection (talk) 03:14, 26 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:37, 30 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so a clearer consensus may be reached.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 18:21, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.